I remember how it was -- JR
Monday, October 16, 2023
Billionaire Board Member to Harvard Leadership: I'm Done
Israeli billionaire Idan Ofer and his wife have resigned from the executive board of Harvard’s Kennedy School in protest of Harvard president Claudine Gay’s initial response to the student letter blaming Israel for the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas terrorists.
Upset at the “shocking and insensitive response by the president of the university, who did not condemn the letter by student organizations who blamed Israel for the massacres,” the couple submitted their resignations, according to reports.
Ofer, a shipping and chemicals magnate, is worth an estimated $20 billion, Bloomberg’s billionaire index shows.
The couple was joined by many others who expressed outrage over Harvard’s response.
“The delayed @Harvard leadership statement fails to meet the needs of the moment,” said former Harvard president Larry Summers on X. “Why can’t we find anything approaching the moral clarity of Harvard statements after George Floyd’s death or Russia’s invasion of Ukraine when terrorists kill, rape, and take hostage hundreds of Israelis attending a music festival?”
******************************************************
Stanford lecturer suspended after 'ordering Jewish students to raise their hands and sit in the corner in public shaming over the oppression of Palestinians'
A Stanford University lecturer has been suspended after asking Jewish students to raise their hands and sit in the corner during a public shaming stunt over the oppression of Palestinians.
The instructor reportedly asked Jewish and Israeli students to ‘identify themselves’ before telling them to grab their belongings and stand in a corner, saying ‘This is what Israel does to the Palestinians,’ The Forward first reported on Thursday.
‘How many people died in the Holocaust?’ he then asked the Jewish students of the class, to which they replied, ‘Six million.’ He allegedly responded, ‘Colonizers killed more than 6 million. Israel is a colonizer.’
He also reportedly stated that Hamas represents the Palestinian people and the horrific acts of terrorism they committed over the weekend were 100 percent legitimate.
Multiple students reported the disturbing incident they recalled as giving ‘1930s vibes,’ to Rabbi Dov Greenberg, director of the Chabad Stanford Jewish Center.
'I was waiting to post this until it was confirmed by multiple sources I trust,' Shaun Maguire posted on X naming Hasan Loggins. 'These are 1930s vibes.'
They identified the instructor as 46-year-old Ameer Hasan Loggins, a Lecturer, at Stanford Introductory Studies of Civic, Liberal, and Global Education, however at this time, Stanford has kept his identity anonymous.
Speaking to the Forward, Rabbi Greenberg said that he was told by at least three students who were in the room that the instructor asked Jewish and Israeli students to identify themselves during a session for a required undergraduate course called ‘Civil, Liberal and Global Education.’
Stanford President Richard Saller and Provost Jenny Martinez addressed a letter to the university community following the reports on Wednesday, claiming the instructor is ‘not currently teaching while the university works to ascertain the facts of the situation.’
‘We have received a report of a class in which a non-faculty instructor is reported to have addressed the Middle East conflict in a manner that called out individual students in class based on their backgrounds and identities,’ the letter read. ‘Without prejudging the matter, this report is a cause for serious concern. Academic freedom does not permit the identity-based targeting of students.’
The school then went on to confirm that 'offensive speech' is acceptable at Stanford but illegal threats cross a boundary.
'It is important to remember that controversial and even offensive speech is allowed except when it crosses the line into certain illegal categories such as threats or harassment for which the threshold is quite high,' the letter continues.
'Unlawful threats and harassment will not be tolerated. Stanford also has content- and viewpoint-neutral time, place, and manner rules that limit locations for banners and signs. Thus, many of the banners and signs have been removed, because they were in places where they are not allowed.
'Moreover, it is worth remembering that while a climate of free expression requires breathing room, our aspiration as a community is for respectful and substantive discourse.'
****************************************************
Parents Who Object to Pornographic Material in School Libraries Aren’t ‘Book Banners’
Randi Weingarten, president of America’s second-largest teachers union, didn’t even wait for Banned Books Week to begin before posting on X: “Texas teacher fired for reading Diary of Anne Frank to class—THIS Speaks for itself!!!”
Just the latest example of “book banning” in our schools, it seemed.
But like almost every other aspect of overwrought book-banning claims, the description of this example is distorted. The book in question was not Anne Frank’s classic “Diary of a Young Girl,” but an adaptation of that work, a graphic novel called “Anne Frank’s Diary” that emphasizes and inflates sexual passages in the original diary.
Specifically, the teacher asked her eighth grade students to read aloud and discuss a sexually explicit passage from that adaptation, in which Frank asks her friend if they could “show each other our breasts” and expresses a “terrible desire to kiss her.” So, what was billed by the avatar of the American education establishment as a proto-fascist incident was just parents reacting to a teacher’s choice to emphasize sex in the Anne Frank story.
This, more or less, is what has been happening for years now in America’s contrived—and, frankly, perverted—debate over “book bans.”
School librarians decide to stock sexually explicit books, frequently far more obscene than the passage above. Parents object to the presence of pornographic material in their children’s school libraries. And then the American education establishment and media try to tar them as “book banners,” suggesting they are racists, transphobes, and akin to Nazis.
The entire conversation on “book banning” has taken place under a false definition promulgated by PEN America, a left-wing advocacy group that purports to monitor an unprecedented spike in “bans.” But it defines “ban” so expansively as to render that term meaningless.
If a book has been temporarily removed, reviewed, and then returned to the shelves, it has been banned, according to PEN. If a school places a parental permission requirement on a book, it has been banned, according to PEN. If a school moves a book to a guidance counselor’s office, it has been banned, according to PEN.
A school in Miami made international news when it supposedly banned the poem by Amanda Gorman that she read at President Joe Biden’s inauguration. What really happened: The K-8 school moved the poem from the elementary to the middle school section of the same library.
Given that most English-language speakers understand the word “ban” to mean “made unavailable,” we conducted a study to determine how many of the 2,532 books that PEN America alleged were banned were actually still present in school libraries. The answer: about three-fourths of them.
The media has fabricated the narrative that book bans are about race. We found that while some parents have certainly objected to books about race, school districts seldom oblige that objection. For example, PEN America listed the Black Lives Matter-inspired “The Hate U Give” as the fifth-most banned book. We found it available in every single school library in question.
The media has also fabricated the narrative that book bans are about LGBTQ identity. But, as The Washington Post documented, only 7% of parental objections included “LGBTQ” without also including the word “sexual.”
All 10 of the books we found that were actually removed most often contained disturbingly explicit passages about sex. Take, for example, the most-banned, “Gender Queer.” That graphic novel features a picture of oral sex being performed on a sex toy. It also contains an X-rated passage.
Lest you think we’re cherry-picking, consider the other top 10 most-removed books.
“This Book Is Gay” provides a how-to guide to find strangers for sex on gay sex apps. “Out of Darkness” contains a rape. “l8r g8r” contains discussions of oral sex. “All Boys Aren’t Blue” contains underage incest. “It’s Perfectly Normal” contains drawings of children masturbating. “Lawn Boy” contains a passage about 10-year-old boys performing oral sex on each other. “Jack of Hearts” talks about a condom that is “covered in s—-.” “Crank” details a meth-fueled rape. “Lucky” also details a rape. And “A Court of Mist and Fury,” tame by comparison, contains an extremely explicit sexual passage.
The true significance of so-called book bans is not some resurgent racist or fascist impulse exhibited by a faction of American parents. It’s the profound moral disconnect between the 90% of Americans who believe that sexually obscene material does not belong in school libraries and an education establishment broadly convinced that it’s good, necessary, and “inclusive” to show children explicit images of sexual acts.
******************************************************
My other blogs: Main ones below
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://australian-politics.blogspot.com/ (AUSTRALIAN POLITICS)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
******************************************************
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment